Intervention can be defined as "the interference in the affairs of another nation or society so as to advance, alter or hinder an action or development."
A state becoming involved in the domestic affairs of another state. According to Michael Walzer, intervention can sometimes be justified but must always be explained by the person who initiated the intervention.
St. Thomas Aquinas accepts that states can intervene as long as they meet three conditions. 1) War was authorized by a ruler. 2) The war was waged for a 'just cause.' 3) The right intentions are present.
John Stuart Mill's goal which is for the "progress of mankind" is central to his ideas on intervention. (Martin, L. 2007). Mill looks at history to explain human development streesing the importance of free thought and action to bring about new and better ideas and thus helping development. Thus Mill justifies foreign intervention if it fosters this process arguing that: “[Individuality] should assert itself. Where, not the person’s own character . . . [is] the rule of conduct, there is wanting . . . the chief ingredient of individual and social progress.” (Martin, L. 2007)
This intervention, according to Mill, however, is not permissible in cases where the people in the foreign country "are struggling against their internal government for free institutions, but that intervention is permissible in cases of the people of a foreign country struggling against an outside force." (Martin, L. 2007)
Imperialism
John Stuart Mill regards imperialism as OK, as long as the country that you are going to imperialise is less developed than you are. Both countries must benefit from imperialism. Mill claims that foreign countries have a duty to promote progress in less developed countries in the instance of the British intervention in India Mill asserts that the Brititsh are providing "good rulers".
Intervention can be defined as "the interference in the affairs of another nation or society so as to advance, alter or hinder an action or development."
A state becoming involved in the domestic affairs of another state. According to Michael Walzer, intervention can sometimes be justified but must always be explained by the person who initiated the intervention.
St. Thomas Aquinas accepts that states can intervene as long as they meet three conditions. 1) War was authorized by a ruler. 2) The war was waged for a 'just cause.' 3) The right intentions are present.
John Stuart Mill's goal which is for the "progress of mankind" is central to his ideas on intervention. (Martin, L. 2007). Mill looks at history to explain human development streesing the importance of free thought and action to bring about new and better ideas and thus helping development. Thus Mill justifies foreign intervention if it fosters this process arguing that: “[Individuality] should assert itself. Where, not the person’s own character . . . [is] the rule of conduct, there is wanting . . . the chief ingredient of individual and social progress.” (Martin, L. 2007)
This intervention, according to Mill, however, is not permissible in cases where the people in the foreign country "are struggling against their internal government for free institutions, but that intervention is permissible in cases of the people of a foreign country struggling against an outside force." (Martin, L. 2007)
Imperialism
John Stuart Mill regards imperialism as OK, as long as the country that you are going to imperialise is less developed than you are. Both countries must benefit from imperialism. Mill claims that foreign countries have a duty to promote progress in less developed countries in the instance of the British intervention in India Mill asserts that the Brititsh are providing "good rulers".
Bibilography:
Martin, L. (2007 June 25th) John Stuart Mill on Intervention and Imperialism. American Chronicle, Retrieved from: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=30526 on 11/10/2007.